Back
Item No. 21
Regular List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND
LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
SWP No.1665/2017 c/w
SWP No.1387/2016
MUNEERA BEGUM
…Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. Z. A. Wani, Adv. (for petitioner in SWP
No.1665/2017)
Ms. Nighat & Ms Ishrat, Advs. Vice Mr. Bhat Fayaz,
Adv.(for petitioner in SWP No.1387/2016)
Vs.
STATE OF J&K & OTHERS
…Respondent(s)
Through:
Mr. Younis, Assisting Counsel, vice Mr. Ab.
Rashid Malik, Sr. AAG for official respondents.
Ms. Nighat & Ms. Ishrat vice Mr. Bhat Fayaz,
Adv. for R6 in SWP No.1665/2017
Mr. Z. A. Wani, Adv.-for R6 in SWP
No.1387/2016
CORAM: H ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN JAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER :
1. The controversy involved in these two writ petitions pertain to engagement of Anganwadi Helper at Anganwadi Centre, Shad Mohalla Gulgam District Kupwara. While Smt. Sharifa Begum filed SWP No.1387/2016 challenging order dated 16.05.2016 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Kupwara, whereby he has issued direction for initiation of fresh selection process for engagement of Anganwadi Helper for the aforesaid Anganwadi Centre, Smt. Muneera Begum filed SWP No.1665/2017, challenging order No.DPO/ICDS/17/1433-36 dated 21.07.2017, whereby her engagement as Anganwadi Helper in Anganwadi Centre Shad Mohalla, Gulgam, Kupwara, made vide order No.DPO/ICDS/Estt/16/1190-93 dated 30.06.2017, has been kept in abeyance.
2. Heard and considered.
3. It seems that pursuant to fresh selection made by the Selection Committee, Smt. Muneera Begum came to be engaged as Anganwadi Helper in terms of order dated 30.06.2017 (supra), that was made pursuant to the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Kupwara, 16.05.2016, which is under challenge in SWP No.1387/2016. It is because of this reason that the official respondents have kept the order dated 30.06.2017 (supra) in abeyance terms of 21.07.2017(supra), which is under challenge in SWP No.1665/2017.
4. The latest stand of the official respondents is that in order to resolve the dispute between the two candidates i.e. the petitioners in the aforesaid writ petitions, and in order to redress grievances of both of them, the official respondents have sanctioned one more Anganwadi Centre for Shad Mohalla Gulgam in terms of order No.04-SMD of 2018 dated 01.01.2018, whereafter Smt. Sharifa Begum has been engaged as Anganwadi Helper for the said newly created Anganwadi Centre in terms of order No.CDPO/ICDS/Trg/18/918-23 dated 14.02.2018. With the issuance of aforesaid order, grievances of both the candidates i.e. Smt. Muneera Begum and Smt. Sharifa Begum, stand redressed.
5. In view of the above subsequent development, there is no justification for the official respondents to keep the order of engagement dated 30.06.2017 issued in favour of Smt. Muneera Begum, in abeyance. Therefore, the impugned order dated 21.07.2017 issued by District Programme Officer, ICDS, Kupwara, deserves to be set aside.
6. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are disposed in the following terms:
(I) Impugned order dated 21.07.2017 issued by District Programme Officer, ICDS, Kupwara, whereby engagement order dated 30.06.2017 issued in favour of Smt. Muneera Begum, has been kept in abeyance, is quashed.
(II) The official respondents shall allow Mst. Muneera Begum to perform her duties in terms of engagement order dated 30.06.2016. The official respondents shall also allow Mst.Sharifa Begum to perform her duties in terms of her engagement order dated 14.02.2018.
AI
The court ruled that the abeyance of an engagement order for Anganwadi Helpers was unjustified after resolving the dispute through the creation of a new center.
The court ruled that the creation of a new Anganwadi Centre resolved the dispute between candidates, quashing the order keeping one candidate's engagement in abeyance.
A party must be given adequate opportunity to present their case in administrative proceedings; failure to do so violates principles of natural justice and invalidates subsequent orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for objective assessment and adherence to guidelines in appointment disputes, and the court's authority to set aside arbitrary orde....
The court ruled that the appointment of an Anganwadi Worker must adhere to government guidelines, and challenges to such appointments require timely action and proper standing.
Principles of natural justice demand that before arriving at any decision which has serious implications and consequences to any person, such person must be heard in his or her defence.
The court upheld the Deputy Commissioner's decision regarding the engagement of Anganwadi Workers based on merit and residency verification, confirming that procedural compliance was met.
Minimum qualification for Anganwadi Helper must be met before considering preference for BPL candidates; engagement lacking this qualification is a nullity.
Point of Law : Anganwadi worker - Appellate Authority has not referred to even a single document or material that would even prima facie suggest that the petitioner was not residing in Mukdam Mohalla....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
